Tuesday, October 30, 2018

Proposal: Organization

Gives a way to make other people take risky actions, and thus move the game forward. It also provides for rotating leadership.

Reached quorum 3 votes to 0. Enacted by Kevan.

Adminned at 31 Oct 2018 16:02:46 UTC

Create a rule named “Orders”

An order has a name, and a requirement. An activist for whom the requirement is true has “fulfilled” the requirement.

Valid orders are:
* Change Activity to [X]: The Activist’s activity is [X], where [X] is a valid activity
* Photograph: The Activist has performed the “Take Photos” action sometime in the dynasty

Create a rule named “Suspicion”

Each activist has an amount of suspicion, tracked in the GNDT and defaulting to zero. Suspicion represents the suspicion other rebels have about the activist.

If an Activist has proven their Loyalty to Peace or Violence, they may reduce their Suspicion to zero at any time.

Create a rule named “The Speaker”

If the same Activist has been the speaker for 48 hours or more, any Activist may change the Speaker to be a random Activist by stating in a comment in the GNDT

Once per 48 hours, an activist who is the speaker may make a “Command” by making a blog with exactly one activists name and the name of exactly one valid order. The activist named in the blog post may “comply” with the Command by posting a comment with the text “command completed!” if they fulfill the order’s requirement. If they make a comment with “command denied” or do not comply with the command within 48 hours, they have rejected the command and gain 1 suspicion.


Kevan: HE/HIM

10-30-2018 18:16:41 UTC

I’m wary of rules that purport to reflect how players currently think and feel about something, yet which use stats which aren’t directly editable by those players. Locking it to particular game actions can only put it out of step with how we’re actually feeling.

There’s nothing stopping anyone right now from saying “Trigon, get planning” or “Brendan, take that photo”, and anyone who declined would be rightly regarded with some suspicion. (But Brendan declining on the grounds that it’s not possible to take photos yet would, under this rule, give him 1 Suspicion which no player actually felt. Trigon switching to Planning and then switching to Sabotage the next morning, before we could call a meeting, would earn 0 Suspicion but some players might feel it.)


derrick: HE/HIM

10-30-2018 18:47:16 UTC


That works good in theory, but if you remember the Moby Dick Dynasty, we couldn’t ever agree on a commander, and even when we had one, organizing a group that ostentatiously has one goal with hidden agendas and no mechanism for balancing the agendas proved very unwieldy. This mechanism focuses attention on one specific player and action at a time, and kills the default “Do Nothing” Action.

As for Suspicion being a stat that purports how currently players think, I’m open to alternatives. Its very real as an abstraction of how many times you have denied being asked to advance the cause. Its not supposed to be one players’s suspicion of another or even the overall suspicion of the group but the ostentatious suspicion.

If there isn’t a mechanism like that, a mechanism is needed to call out, attack, or otherwise penalize someone you believe to be a traitor.

Brendan: HE/HIM

10-30-2018 23:48:55 UTC


Kevan: HE/HIM

10-31-2018 09:13:39 UTC

Ah, if you were intending it as the opinion of a wider group of activists who aren’t the players (and who can be easily gulled into believing that Brendan is a traitor for not taking an impossible photo, or that Trigon did a good thing by flipping to Planning for a few hours), then that makes more sense, so long as we’re careful that it doesn’t drift into representing how the actual players feel.